dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3232
share rss forum feed


Zorack

join:2001-12-14
Fayetteville, WV
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

1 recommendation

Ipv6

So I take it suddenlink is still slow on the ball with Ipv6,I believe almost 2 years after they announced plans to convert for it? I think it'll be another 15 years before they get on with the times.
--
Matt Barlow Rules! Bring him back to Iced Earth! \m/


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3
Why would it even matter if you were running IPv6 right now? Not sure much if anything is IPv6 exclusive.


Zorack

join:2001-12-14
Fayetteville, WV

1 recommendation

reply to Zorack
I'd rather suddenlink be ready when it does become the standard. So I think it does matter.
--
Matt Barlow Rules! Bring him back to Iced Earth! \m/


DataDoc
My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D.
Premium
join:2000-05-14
Martinsburg, WV
So call 'em. One phone call is worth a thousand whines on a forum.

Even this one.
--
"Executive orders" or rule by fiat. You decide.


Zorack

join:2001-12-14
Fayetteville, WV
LOL And I suppose you like cheese with your post as well.


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3
reply to Zorack
When you look at the sheer amount of things on ipv4, 6 isn't going to be the standard for awhile. Be even longer before ipv4 will be cut off to sites and services. In all honesty I'd look for html5 to be mainstream first.


whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

said by moldypickle:

When you look at the sheer amount of things on ipv4, 6 isn't going to be the standard for awhile. Be even longer before ipv4 will be cut off to sites and services. In all honesty I'd look for html5 to be mainstream first.

The problem will first manifest itself in P2P, gaming, end host stuff. Your popular sites will be able to pay $50/mo for an IPv4 address, not really a problem.

What will happen is ISPs cannot justify that for end-users so they start to deploy carrier-grade-NAT. So while you might be able to reach the popular sites, other users on the internet will be effectively IPv6 only.

TL;DR: Popular sites won't be where you run into problems as they can pay $$$ for IPv4 addresses. It'll be reaching other end-users on the Internet as they can't pay $$$ for IPv4.


Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21

1 recommendation

reply to Zorack
Been running an IPv6 tunnel for 5+ years now, would be nice to have native dual-stack.
--
If you can't open it, you don't own it.


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to whfsdude
And how many YEARS out do you see that happening? My entire point is that it's not that big of a deal that SL doesn't have their entire network live w/ native ipv6 right now. Also, if we were to be running native 6 right now, correct me if i'm wrong, but that would break all the p2p and gaming with other people running 4?


whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

2 recommendations

said by moldypickle:

And how many YEARS out do you see that happening? My entire point is that it's not that big of a deal that SL doesn't have their entire network live w/ native ipv6 right now.

AT&T is in the process of rolling out carrier grade NAT for their DSL users. Plusnet is doing the same thing (there was just a story about that).

My cellphone is IPv6 only (with NAT64). (T-Mobile). Verizon now has v4 on CGN and v6 native (LTE only).

If you use IPv6 on Netflix you automatically connect to their OpenConnect network, bypassing the whole v4 peering issue for HD/3D content.

It's already here, it'll just get worse over the next year or two.

The thing is SL isn't going to be able to magically flip a switch and enable v6 throughout their network. It's going to take two or three years. Look at how long it has taken Comcast to enable just 50% of their network (3 years).

said by moldypickle:

Also, if we were to be running native 6 right now, correct me if i'm wrong, but that would break all the p2p and gaming with other people running 4?

You would dual stack. SL would provide you with both an IPv4 address and an IPv6 address. Wouldn't break anything.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
said by whfsdude:

AT&T is in the process of rolling out carrier grade NAT for their DSL users. Plusnet is doing the same thing (there was just a story about that).

Actually Plusnet made it pretty clear this was for testing only and users were being invited to help test out their CGN implementation to get a feel for what the real world issues would be. Users would be receiving a separate login to facilitate testing.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

reply to moldypickle
said by moldypickle:

When you look at the sheer amount of things on ipv4, 6 isn't going to be the standard for awhile. Be even longer before ipv4 will be cut off to sites and services. In all honesty I'd look for html5 to be mainstream first.

You seem to be under the misguided impression that people are expecting a full conversion to IPv6 over night. That isn't the case. ISPs will be rolling out dual-stack service meaning both v4 and v6. This allows for a gradual migration and users will slowly start connecting to sites via v6 as more sites/services enable v6 a few years out it'll get to the point where very little is using v4 for mainstream sites and services. ISPs will roll out CGN and that will break things or cause additional complications for things like P2P / games, video conferencing and other services and the cost of doing business with v4 will become too great as well as the lack of address space to roll out services especially on the business side of things. It'll be cheaper/easier to use v6. It is only logical.

For a lot of sites HTML5 is already mainstream.

Moostang

join:2009-03-24
Tyler, TX

1 recommendation

reply to Zorack
I wouldn't be too anxious for IPv6. If they do it like other ISP's have, new customers will be native IPv6 but for any non-ipv6 destinations, you will be CG-NAT'd to a shared IPv4 address which will pretty much break any server based applications that are not ready for IPv6.

For example, if you want to host a Vent server it will have to be IPv6 only because you will not have your own ipv4 address.


Demog

@cebridge.net
Pretty typical thread on this board....

Question: When is SL going to support some new technology that other ISPs already have?

Answer: You don't need it, it is stupid. Keep paying your bill.


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

1 recommendation

Even more typical on this board....

Randoms coming in thinking they're hot shit. Pretty damn sure that no one said we don't need IPv6, extremely sure that no one said it was stupid, and positive this has nothing to do with paying the bill.

Would like to thank you for your utterly useless addition to this thread and kindly ask you to climb back under the bridge you were hiding under.

Trolls, piss me straight off

--
30/2 Suddenlink : Current
5/1 CMA : Old
15/2 TWC : Old

Moostang

join:2009-03-24
Tyler, TX

1 recommendation

reply to Zorack
I fully understand the need for IPv6. I am currently running dual stack on my home network. Of course my IPv6 is traversing a Hurricane Electric GRE tunnel.

I was just stating that until the Internet is mostly IPv6 ready, there were be some severe growing pains for Customers and ISP's.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Moostang
said by Moostang:

I wouldn't be too anxious for IPv6. If they do it like other ISP's have, new customers will be native IPv6 but for any non-ipv6 destinations, you will be CG-NAT'd to a shared IPv4 address which will pretty much break any server based applications that are not ready for IPv6.

For example, if you want to host a Vent server it will have to be IPv6 only because you will not have your own ipv4 address.

CG-NAT will be in use even if you're not using IPv6. One has nothing to do with the other.


Demog

@cebridge.net
MP...surely you are a SLer, you weigh in on every post, pro SL, and attack others with differing opinions


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
Hello again troll. Clearly you don't read my posts as I'm on both sides of the bridge. You'd also know that I don't work for them in any way shape or form if you've read my posts as I've said as much many times. That is also assuming that's what SLer means O.o

So again, thanks for posting Mr. Anon, but I would also like you to show me where I have attacked anyone else because they have a different opinion. The entire point of a forum on the internet is to bring together people or either similar or different points of views and let them discuss the topic which is what we have been doing. Pretty sure I would also have been banned after all these years of 'attacking others' -.-

Better luck w/ the trolling next time!

Moostang, what benefit do you get on your network running a dual stack currently. Is there any gain currently, or just that you are configured for when it is needed? Also, are you tunneling out of the router or just your computer?
--
30/2 Suddenlink : Current
5/1 CMA : Old
15/2 TWC : Old

Moostang

join:2009-03-24
Tyler, TX
Moldypickle, the only real benefit to running dual stack is I am able to pass all of the Hurricane Electric (HE) IPv6 tests (cept like mail server).

I actually had disabled IPv6 for a while due to how DNS works with a dual stacked Windows box. When you have a single interface with both IPv4 and IPv6, the IPv6 side is treated as the "primary". So the IPv6 DNS would mostly be used. The problem I had with this is that I had 60ms latency to HE's IPv6 DNS server which increased the time to resolve domains and load web pages.

However, since then, Google has turned up IPv6 DNS servers and has less than 10ms latency for me so I have since turned IPv6 back up and it is running flawlessly.

I am tunneling IPv6 through a GRE tunnel on a Cisco 2611 that I grabbed on ebay for about $70. However, it is only capable of about 15mb of routed traffic. All of my computers are natively dual stacked. However, I use an Asus router for all IPv4 traffic and the 2611 for all IPv6 traffic. Basically my 2611 is the gateway for IPv6 and my Asus is the gateway for IPv4.

I graph my GRE tunnel and the bandwidth utilization shows that my network is barely using IPv6 at this time. The internet just isn't IPv6 ready yet. From what I can tell, mostly google based services are using my IPv6 connection.

jdmm72

join:2002-02-12
Nitro, WV
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

1 recommendation

reply to Demog
said by Demog :

MP...surely you are a SLer, you weigh in on every post, pro SL, and attack others with differing opinions

Obviously you don't follow moldy. I will also vouch that he isn't a Suddenlink yes man, nor does he work for SL. He just calls it as he sees it.

I also agree that IPv6 isn't urgent right now, some are transitioning to it now, but noy all. I remember in 2000, 13 years ago, the powers that be and Cisco talking about how the Internet on IPv4 was doomed and that an immediate need existed to go to IPv6. We are in 2013 (13 years later), the Internet is still working primarily on IPv4.

Do I think it will happen at some point, maybe. It may be a higher number by the time we get around to it. IPv7 is already DoA, what about 8,9,10?


Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21

1 recommendation

reply to Zorack
Any news? I've got my DHCPv6-PD setup ready to switch over from the HE.net tunnel.
--
If you can't open it, you don't own it.


XANAVirus
Premium
join:2012-03-03
Lavalette, WV
Reviews:
·Callcentric

1 recommendation

So, how will this work for people who host multiplayer games for games made in the 90s?

There will not be any patch for those games, ever, because everyone aside from a few dedicated 'retro' gamers will have moved on to the latest and greatest games already.

Will I have to rely upon my paid VPN service to connect between remote hosts such as with hosting multiplayer games that require an IP to connect to?

I can do that, if I need to, because they allow it in technical form (e.g. they aren't preventing it from working).


moldypickle

join:2009-01-04
Haughton, LA
kudos:3

1 recommendation

There are already work arounds out for those older games. Usually involve a matching service (think Gamespy or the likes). These services, depending upon which one, can also link games across the internet in LAN mode too.